Loise Njeri & 9 others v Kamau Ngure & another [2016] KEELC 862 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's Environment and Land Court struck out a land suit as res judicata because the same ownership dispute had already been decided in 1983.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the suit is res judicata Nyeri HCC No. 282 of 1983
Yes; the issues of ownership of Loc.7/Maragua Ridge/50 and existence of Plot 39'A' were previously determined.
The court found that the pleadings in HCC 282 of 1983 and the current suit raised the same issue, namely whether L.R NO. LOC7/Ridge Block 39A, from which plots 264-269 were created, exists. Plot 39'A' was excised from plot 50, ownership of which was determined in 1983 in favour of the defendant, with eviction orders issued. Some plaintiffs were parties to the earlier suit, whose decree and eviction orders were upheld through review and stay proceedings and before the Court of Appeal.
Whether a letter of allotment from the Ministry of Lands entitles the plaintiffs to re-litigate
No; such evidence must be pursued by way of review, not a fresh suit.
The plaintiffs relied on a letter dated 23rd September 2005 indicating them as allottees of plots excised from Plot 39'A', and a Ministry of Lands letter of 10th August 2011 nullifying Plot 39'A'. The court held that even if there were evidence that Plot 39'A' exists, this does not confer a right to re-litigate a matter already determined; the recognised avenue is review under Sections 7 and 100 of the Civil Procedure Act.
Whether the suit was filed to circumvent the earlier decree
Yes; the court found the suit was an abuse of court process.
Relying on its earlier ruling of 22nd June 2015 and the Court of Appeal ruling in Nyeri Court of Appeal Civil Application No. 230 of 2011, the court found that after failing to overturn the decree in HCCC No. 252/282 of 1983, including through dismissed stay and review applications, some plaintiffs filed a fresh suit rather than appeal, amounting to abuse of process and an attempt to circumvent the eviction orders.
Legal principles established
#- A suit whose issues were previously heard and determined by a court of competent jurisdiction is res judicata and cannot be re-litigated by way of a fresh suit.
- New evidence challenging a court order must be raised by way of review, not a fresh suit.
Court orders
#- 1.Allowed the defendant's notice of motion dated 13th July 2015 seeking to strike out the suit on grounds of res judicata
- 2.Declares the suit res judicata Nyeri HCC No. 282 of 1983 and strikes it out (allowed as prayed)
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Sections 7 and 100 of the Civil Procedure Act, Cap 2 Laws of Kenya (res judicata); first-instance civil suit jurisdiction
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Loise Njeri & 9 others v Kamau Ngure & another [2016] KEELC 862 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2016). Nyeri HCCC No. 222 of 2012 (formerly Nyeri HCCC No. 222 of 2012, Loise Njeri & 9 others v. Joseph Maina). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2016/862/eng@2016-05-26
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.